Note: The degree of the larceny is
determined by the value of the property stolen. See § 53a-122 (first degree); § 53a-123 (second degree); § 53a-124 (third
degree); § 53a-125 (fourth degree); § 53a-125a
(fifth degree); § 53a-125b (sixth degree). The dollar amounts for the
degrees of larceny were increased as of October 1, 2009. See the table in
Introduction to Larceny for the values in effect
prior to that date.

This offense requires that the
defendant has also committed a violation of § 53a-157a, False Statement in the
First Degree. If that offense is charged in a separate count, the court may
simply refer to that count for the first three elements, and instruct the jury
that if they have found the defendant guilty on that count, then the first three
elements of this offense have been met.

The defendant is charged [in count __]
with larceny by failure to pay prevailing rate of wages in the (first / second /
third / fourth / fifth / sixth) degree. The statute defining this offense reads
in pertinent part as follows:

a person is guilty of failure to
pay prevailing rate of wages when (he/she) (A) files a certified payroll,1
which (he/she) knows is false, and (B) fails to pay to an employee or to an
employee welfare fund the amount attested to in the certified payroll with the
intent to convert such amount to (his/her) own use or to the use of a third
party.

For you to find the defendant guilty
of this charge, the state must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable
doubt:

Element 1 - Contract for public
works projectThe first element is that a contract
existed between <insert name of contractor> and <insert name of
agency or political subdivision> for <insert specific nature of contract>.

Element 2 - Made a false
statementThe second element is that the
defendant knowingly made a false written statement on a certified payroll. A
person acts "knowingly"
with respect to conduct or circumstances when (he/she) is aware that (his/her)
conduct is of such nature or that such circumstances exist. <See
Knowledge, Instruction 2.3-3.>

Element 3 - Known to be falseThe third element is that that
statement was not true and the defendant did not believe the statement to be
true.

Element 4 - Intent to misleadThe fourth element is that the
defendant made the statement with the specific intent to mislead a contracting
authority or the labor commissioner in the exercise of (his/her) authority or
the fulfillment of (his/her) duties.2
A person acts "intentionally"
with respect to a result when (his/her) conscious objective is to cause such
result. <See
Intent: Specific, Instruction 2.3-1.>

Element 5 - Failed to pay
according to certified payrollThe fifth element is that the
defendant failed to pay the amount attested to in the certified payroll to an
employee or an employee welfare fund.

Element 6 - Intent to convertThe sixth element is that the
defendant intended to convert the amount to (his/her) own use or to the use of a
third party. "Conversion" means an unauthorized assumption and exercise of the
right of ownership over property belonging to another, to the exclusion of the
owner's rights. In this case, the property consists of the wages owed according
to the certified payroll.

Element 7 - ValueThe final element is that the
converted wages had a value that <insert as appropriate:>

<See
Larceny, Instruction 9.1-1, for a full explanation of this element.>

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove
beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) there was a contract between <insert name
of contractor> and <insert name of agency or political subdivision>
for <insert specific nature of contract>, 2) the defendant intentionally
made a false written statement on a certified payroll, 3) the defendant did not
believe the statement was true, 4) the defendant made the statement with the
specific intent to mislead a contracting authority or the labor commissioner in
the exercise of (his/her) authority or the fulfillment of (his/her) duties, 5)
the defendant did not pay the amount attested to in the certified payroll to an
employee or an employee welfare fund, 6) the defendant intended to convert that
amount to (his own use / her own use / the use of a third party), and 7) the
value of the converted wages was <insert value according to the degree
charged>.

If you unanimously find that the state
has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements of the crime of
larceny by failure to pay prevailing rate of wages, then you shall find the
defendant guilty. On the other hand, if you unanimously find that the state has
failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of the elements, you shall then
find the defendant not guilty.
_______________________________________________________

1
In accordance with § 31-53. Pursuant to § 31-53, every employer on a public
works project shall submit weekly to the contracting agency a certified payroll
indicating, among other things, that the rate of wages paid to each mechanic,
laborer or workman and the amount of payment or contributions paid or payable on
behalf of each such employee to any employee welfare fund, are not less than the
prevailing rate of wages and the amount of payment or contributions paid or
payable on behalf of each such employee to any employee welfare fund are not
less than those required by the contract to be paid.

2
The intent element is derived from § 53a-157a, False Statement in the First
Degree, which is specifically cited in § 53a-119 (14). See
False Statement in the First Degree, Instruction 4.2-1.